About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
, but it may not be an immediate effect on the economy. yes, there are cuts that go into effect on the pentagon, it's about a 7% or 8% cut on everything. everybody will look at this and say, this is probably the worst way to cut the pentagon budget as one pentagon official said to me at one point, what did we do? call up northrup grumman and say we don't want the last 7% of that airplane, keep the tail? >> it's more of a slope than a cliff. >> the cliff is a little bit of a misnomer, but it could be a cliff in the sense that markets can react very badly. we have really lucked out in the sense that despite our apparent inability to govern ourselves and come to the compromises that everybody wants that we haven't been punished too much by the market so far. but one much the things that's interesting. you have the extremes in both parties willing to go over the cliff at the same time you ask matt dowd, senator durbin and graham if they were an anomaly. i don't think they are in the sense that i think they're a growing cadre especially in the senate of members from both parties who understand eleme
the sequestered . but did so by impacted the pentagon less heavily than the sequestered it. but divided government, i think you get the question. president said he does not want to change the money for the pentagon. mitch mcconnell said we are not raising taxes to ransom the pentagon budget cuts. a lot of focus has been on the pentagon but these are more concerned about the $50 billion in domestic discretionary spending restraint every year. you did to the republican study committee. the announced all a thing worse than sequestration would not be having savings. this stampede attempted did not take. he denied a demand that the defense budget be remain untouched, either of the public opinion or the house. i think sequestration happens. the only thing i could imagine is if they -- the r's and d's would both rather take it out of entitlements rather than the annual budgets. could they cut a deal where they save the same amount of money but out of entitlements? that is the only compromise i could see. then you get to the grand bargain idea. it seems every time i have these conversations were people as
as the pentagon. we ought to be thinking of that in terms of our values and our future. let me speak to a couple of elements here that i think progressives should keep in mind. progressives cannot afford to stand on the sidelines in this fiscal cliff debate. important critical decisions will be made soon that will affect this country for 10 years. i think we need to be a part of this conversation. we need to be open to some topics and some issues that are painful and hard for us to talk about. we cannot stand by the sidelines in denial that this is ever going to engage us in the things we value. we cannot be so naive to believe that just taxing the rich will solve our problems. i believe that is an important part of a solution. we have to look to reform and change that is significant, that preserves many of the values and programs that brought us political life, and we cannot believe that merely ignoring these programs or not engaging will solve the problem. pick up any of the newspapers and look for the full-page ads and you will see on a daily basis organizations that we respect and are engage
for the pentagon and fluctuations in global energy prices can have dramatic, dramatic effects on defense spending. for every $10 increase in a barrel of oil it costs the american military annually an extra $1.3 billion. recognizing the potential instability that d.o.d.'s current energy needs can cause, military experts from across the various branches of the armed services have begun looking at ways to cut energy use and find energy alternative. now, i continued to hear all of this discussion about how this is somehow a green agenda and it's a suber havesive plot and it's being forced on a resistant president. and i just want to take a minute or two, mr. president, and say i don't think anything could be further from the truth and just wanted to describe for a moment why i feel that way. first, those who oppose defense energy initiatives often argue in today's fiscal environment, the country can't afford to waste money on energy programs when it's necessary to provide for our nation's security. i don't believe, mr. president, it is an either/or proposition, because my view is that an investment i
and shaped by general jones who has unique experience of serving in the pentagon and in the military and as the national security adviser to the president. he made a point that i was familiar with based on my experiences, that we had all these different agencies and departments and people all over the government as well as in the congress that had parts of the energy package but it never had a way to be brought together to take a look at what should be our energy policy and came up with this idea of the council which we are recommending where you pull all of the different departments chaired by the department of energy secretary, agencies, that will reach out to all the different interested parties to make sure their views are being taken into consideration. to do this quadrennial agency review somewhat similar to what they have done at the pentagon. it is very different from what they do at the pentagon. it is a technique that i have observed that works and is helpful for the department of the defense. talking about a strategy, a broader view, and then through the report get into th
. >> i was reporting from the comfort of the north lawn, the physis and the pentagon and a warehouse and it troops surged numbers. in new one and was about more of them while was reporting on. lou: your focus on this particular panel who, he targe of more than 225 individuals when. >> i work done for two and a half years in new will learn. it was a big project. every time i thought i was done, no, he need to talk to this guy. alternately and just said the stock because there will never be a time when i talked to everybody. lou: you were pursuing one of the toughest explanations of how those tend to be, and he the target. and it would been detected low will. >> pile was enough to hospital with my newborn son we want. of a corner of my eye and saw the story about the attack this coverage was all along the lines of, why would anybody put an outpost there. the chemistry that i needed to solve it. why would you put our troops in such a vulnerable position, but then it became partisan line to be so outnumbering. the stories suspect him remarkable. we cover the war among but we don't re
the pentagon hoping to force the military to drop its policy that excludes them from thousands of ground combat positions. all four women are veterans of the war in iraq and afghanistan. they main the combat exclusion role is discriminatory. >> the policy limits my future in the marine corps. i would be assigned to positions based on my gender rather than on my qualifications or my accomplishments. this didn't make sense personally or politically and it did not make sense for the military. >> she also says this prevents commanders from deciding the best way to fight. >>> so what would you do with $500 million? that's tonight's record-shattering powerball jackpot expected to climb higher. millions of americans in 42 states are trying to parlay $2 into half a billion. alison kosik is live from times square this morning. what's happening there? 60% of ticket sales are expected to be made today. we know the odds are pretty slim, but people are still going for it. >> reporter: they are still going for it. you know, you talk about the odds, the odds are slim. 175 million to 1 are the odds that you'll
to our pentagon correspondent barbara starr. barbara, what are you learning? >> well, wolf, north korea says it is pursuing trying to launch a satellite into space. but intelligence services around the world doubt that that is true. this satellite image of a north korean missile launch pad was just snapped in the last 24 hours. u.s. government officials and private experts say it shows the same types of preparations including trucks and fuel tanks not seen since april when a long-range missile failed seconds after launch. north korea claimed then it was just trying to launch a satellite. the new digital globe image and this one taken just days before don't yet show a missile. but with these kinds of preps, a launch could happen in about three weeks if a missile is put on the launch pad according to analysis by digital globe. north korea watchers say the new leader, kim jong-un may be responding to internal political pressure from hardliners. >> on the other hand, he may also want it himself. he may decide it's the right kind of provocation just before the south korean president election
american service women are suing the pentagon, hoping to force the military to drop its policy that excludes women from thousands of ground combat positions. all four are veterans of the wars in iraq and afghanistan. two have been awarded the purple heart. they maintain that the exclusion rule is discriminatory. >> i would be assigned positions based on my gender rather than my qualifications. it didn't make sense for me personal personally or professionally and it doesn't make sense for the military. >> a dangerous set of rule that is prevent commanders deciding the best way to fight. >>> yahoo!'s new ceo is headed to the white house to discuss the fiscal cliff with the president. her new gig and her new son have been full of surprises. >> baby has been easy. the baby has been way easier than everyone made it out to be. i think i've been really lucky that way. i had a very easy, healthy pregnancy. he has been easy. so those have been two really terrific surprises. the kids have been easier and the job has been fun. >> mayer says her secret to getting everything done is ruthles
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)